John Healey: On 26 March I made a statement to the House on council tax capping. In this, I set out the action that the Government proposed to take, under the Local Government Finance Act 1992, against two police authorities which had set excessive budget requirement and council tax increases in 2009-10 according to the principles that I announced, Official Report, columns 464-65. These were the police authorities of Derbyshire and Surrey. Both authorities were "designated" and the Government proposed maximum 2009-10 budget requirements for each authority.
	Both authorities exercised their right to challenge these proposed maximum budget requirements and made written submissions in support of their cases. In addition, I and the Policing Minister, together met delegations from each authority to hear the cases in person.
	I can now announce how my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government intends to proceed, having carefully considered these representations, and having taken into account all relevant information. In putting forward their challenges, neither authority has, in the Secretary of State's view, presented strong arguments as to why an excessive increase was necessary, or demonstrated that the pressures identified acted disproportionately upon them to any significant extent compared to other authorities. We intend therefore to take action in both cases.
	After careful consideration, the Secretary of State has decided to take the following action:
	first, we will proceed with the designation of Surrey Police Authority in 2009-10 at the level of the original budget requirement cap (£197,206,000);
	secondly, we will cancel the designation of Derbyshire Police Authority and nominate it instead with a proposed notional budget requirement at the level of the original budget requirement cap (£163,511,000).
	In the case of Surrey Police Authority, the House will recall that last year the authority was set a notional budget requirement in 2008-09 instead of being designated for in year capping in that year. This allowed the authority to keep all of its excessive increase in 2008-09, avoided the need for it to rebill and gave it an opportunity to avoid setting an excessive increase in the current financial year, 2009-10. Surrey Police Authority has failed to take that opportunity. I am particularly mindful that I provided an assurance to the House during the capping debate on 9 July 2008 that the residents of all the authorities which were set notional budget requirements last year, including those in Surrey, would be protected against excessive increases in 2009-10. I consider that the Government must take meaningful action which makes good that commitment.
	The approach we have taken, in nominating Derbyshire Police Authority and setting a notional budget requirement is equivalent to the action we took against Surrey Police Authority in 2008-09. It is intended to limit the authority's scope for setting excessive increases in subsequent years. This will be achieved by measuring future budget requirement increases for capping purposes against its 2009-10 notional budget requirement. From the actions we have taken this year, the authority should be in no doubt that the Government will take firm action, should we need to do so next year, to ensure that council tax payers are provided with adequate protection.
	My officials are writing to both authorities today to inform them of these decisions. Subject to approval of an order which we intend to lay before the House following the local and European elections in June, Surrey Police Authority will need to re-bill its residents for a lower level of council tax. Derbyshire Police Authority, having been nominated in 2009-10 and set a notional budget requirement, has 21 days from receipt of the notification in which to challenge its proposed notional budget requirement.
	Ideally the Government would not be taking capping action, but the Government consistently made it clear that we would act to protect council taxpayers from excessive increases. This is what we have done. I am nevertheless conscious of the fact that local government generally has done a great deal to ensure that they do not place unnecessary pressures on their council taxpayers. More than 99 per cent. of authorities did not set excessive increases—and the average Band D council tax increase in England for 2009-10 is 3 per cent. The average household council tax bill is almost £240 lower than the average Band D amount, and will increase by just 2.6 per cent.—the lowest such increase since council tax was introduced in 1993.
	There is no excuse for excessive increases in council tax and authorities should remain in no doubt that the Government will not hesitate to use their capping powers to deal with excessive increases in future years, including requiring authorities to rebill residents if this proves necessary.

Bob Ainsworth: I am able to inform the House today of the outcome of the Royal Air Force study that has been undertaken to consider the future basing requirements of the Joint Aircraft Recovery and Transportation Squadron (JARTS) units as part of our continuing commitment to ensuring that the best use is made of the Defence Estate.
	The primary role of JARTS is to manage the recovery and transportation of both military and, in some instances, civilian aircraft. Currently, there is a team based at Vector Aerospace Fleetlands, in Gosport, which deals with helicopter recovery and transportation; and a team at MOD St. Athan which deals with fixed wing aircraft. The study was undertaken to consider options to collocate the rotary and fixed wing elements, to identify the best value for money and most affordable basing options to meet the operational and training requirements of JARTS.
	Based on the recommendations of this work, I have decided that the rotary wing element, currently located at Vector Aerospace Fleetlands, and fixed wing element, currently located at MOD St. Athan will collocate at MOD Boscombe Down, subject to Trades Union consultation. Not only does this option represent the best value for money and generate savings which cannot be achieved through the current dislocated nature of the organisation, it also offers operational benefits through simplified command and control processes and increased operational flexibility. Subject to the necessary infrastructure being in place, the collocation is due to be complete by late 2010. Service and civilian personnel will be briefed on the progress of the move.